ASSESSMENT: CLAIMS AND EVIDENCES BY OKPARA UCHE THADDEUS Department of Agricultural Economics, Uniersit! of "igeria E#mail$ uc%e&purpose'!a%oo(co(u) E*ECUT+,E SU--ARY Follow-up, auditing, impact monitoring, compliance monitoring and post- development monitoring are familiar to environmental assessment practitioners as members of a family of terms that relate to the general concept of feedback in the Environmental Impact Assessment EIA! system, and they are commonly used interchangeably in literature" #he term post-development monitoring is adopted for this study and it is conceptualised as the measurement of environmental variables during pro$ect construction and operation to determine the changes which may have occurred as a result of the pro$ect" %ost-development monitoring represents a crucial point in assessing the predictive force of the EIA procedure and it is becoming widely accepted as the most crucial element of any EIA system" &ost countries in developed and developing nations now have some form of EIA monitoring systems" 'ountries like 'anada, Australia and the (etherlands that have long traditions of EIA practice, have well established legislative re)uirements for EIA monitoring" In *+, monitoring is self- regulatory" In developing countries, monitoring practices are recent and not well coordinated even though there are regulations in place" Information on monitoring is meager, scattered and the lessons learnt from EIA e,perience not well documented and shared amongst stakeholders especially in Ethiopia, -outh Africa and (igeria" .hile the benefits and needs for monitoring are well documented, and the re)uirements spelt out, there seem to be only few pro$ects that undergo monitoring in most of the ten countries surveyed in this study" #he tasks and responsibility for monitoring are shared amongst proponents, regulators and the public communities!" .hat each partner does and when, are defined by each countries regulations" .hile developed countries boast of a robust track record of public participation and openness in their monitoring activities, the developing countries lack well designed process for involving the public and the parties involved lack the re)uired training and character" #he study proposed some recommendations which sum up to suggest that post-development monitoring can and will succeed if national governments show high level commitment and make efforts to build information e,change networks across borders" .( +"TRODUCT+O" .(. Bac)groun/ +nformation %ost-development monitoring is gradually becoming the most crucial element of the EIA system &orrison- -aunders et al", /001!" EIA practitioners worldwide agree that impact monitoring is one important practice through which EIA can fulfill its potential to learn from e,perience .ood, /000!" #he practice connotes a comprehensive short or long-term hindsight review of development pro$ects that have undergone assessment, received approval and are under construction, recently completed, fully operational or about to be decommissioned 2arry, 3445!" &onitoring transforms EIA from a one time pre-pro$ect predictive e,ercise to a continual assessment of impacts, thus closing the loop between pre and post-decision analyses -hepherd, 3445!" &onitoring plays several key roles in the EIA system" It provides feedback by comparing the actual impacts of a pro$ect with its predicted impacts facilitates learning!, it improves pro$ect outcomes through better adaptive pro$ect management facilitates control! and it enhances communication of environmental performance facilitates environmental information retrieval! &orrison--aunders et al", /006!" .ith the increasing recognition of the roles of monitoring world wide, the era where little attention is paid to the actual / effects of pro$ects after an EIA document is completed is gradually fissling out" -ystematic follow-up and feedback has conferred on EIA the capacity to produce real world environmental benefits Arts et al", /003!" In spite of its relevance, monitoring is not yet a well established activity in most countries" A number of recognisable reasons are responsible for this" Environmental monitoring data are e,pensive and difficult to collect, interpret and integrate with other sources of data 'anter, 3447!" Also, monitoring is time consuming and most pro$ect proponents are not usually patient enough to pay attention to assessing baseline or future conditions -hepherd, 3445!" &onitoring agencies lack guidance since e,isting regulations in most countries do not provide clear procedures for monitoring .ood, /000!" In some regions like the *- and 'anada! impact monitoring is often embroiled in fears of self-incrimination between agencies and proponents 'arpenter, 3447!" #hese challenges notwithstanding, the practice of EIA post-development monitoring is a key to the success of the EIA process" #he practice embraces the four elements of monitoring, evaluation, management and communication Arts et al", /003!" Its success in any country will depend greatly upon the regulatory and institutional arrangements that drive it" 8ther factors that may likely affect the practice are the approaches and techni)ues adopted and the resources finance and humans! available for effective e,ecution &orrison--aunders et al", /006!" -tudies have shown that most developed countries and over half of the middle income countries in Africa, Asia and -outh America have some form of impact monitoring re)uirements, either mandatory or voluntary 9eorge, /000: ;outhed, /004!" For some it might be a provision more on paper than practice like -outh Africa, Ethiopia, <ong +ong and (igeria!" In some developed countries like 'anada, the (etherlands and Australia, impact monitoring is already a legislative re)uirement &orrison--aunders et al", /006!" .(0 Aim of t%e Paper 6 #he aim of this paper is primarily to critically review the practice of EIA post-development monitoring in some selected developed and developing countries that have the monitoring procedure operational in their EIA system! with a view to assessing the legislative re)uirements for the practice and the individuals involved in monitoring" 0( POST#DE,E1OP-E"T -O"+TOR+"2 +" PRACT+CE$ 1E2+S1AT+,E RE3U+RE-E"TS 0(. Oerie4 .hile the benefits and needs for impact monitoring are well documented and replete in literature, the actual means of implementing it are lacking: which is why a country may have laid-out legislative re)uirements for monitoring but few pro$ects would actually be followed-up Arts et al., /003!" <owever, having regulations or legislative re)uirements in place is an important first step in initiating EIA monitoring of pro$ects during the construction and operation phases" Across the different countries that have introduced EIA follow-up, four distinct approaches in setting up regulations have been observed" #hese are= 3! the traditional command and control approach where legislative influence is paramount (igeria and -outh Africa are e,ample!, /! the self regulation approach where the commitment of the proponents is paramount like in *+ and to an e,tent Australia!, and 6! the public pressure approach where the drive to meet the demands of the public or communities enforces follow-up 'arpenter, 3447: &orrison--aunders, /006!" <aving some formal regulations helps make follow-up or monitoring a more structured and systematic e,ercise in practice" 0(0 Reie4 of impact monitoring re5uirements in some selecte/ Countries >iterature shows that the content and )uality of the regulations vary greatly from country to country 9eorge, /000: .ood, /000: +engne, /004: ;outhed, /004!" E,periences and country goals are known to influence prevailing regulation" 2ased on available information in literature, a review of legislative re)uirements for impact monitoring in <ong +ong, %ortugal, 'anada, the (etherlands, *+, '?ech @ Aepublic and Australia will suffice here" #hese countries are developed and have long tradition of EIA practice" Hong Kong= Impacts prediction and derivation of mitigation measures characterised <ong +ongBs early approach to EIA" In 3440, an Environmental &onitoring and Audit E&CA! Aegulatory -ystem was introduced and later amended in 3445 by an EIA 8rdinance to make it a statutory re)uirement and ensure effectiveness and accountability in EIA practice Arts, et al., /003!" According to <ui /000!, the ma$or re)uirements set by the E&CA regulation are that proponents must compulsorily secure environmental permits binding legal documents! for construction, operation andDor decommissioning, and that they must employ Independent Environmental 'hecker IE'! to check works carried out and the data collected by environmental teams in charge of actual monitoring and audit of work done on sites" #he IE' also verifies and certifies that mitigation measures are fully and correctly e,ecuted according to recommendations in the EIA report" #he re)uirements are binding for all impact monitoring activities Arts, et al., /003!" Cana/a= #he 'anadian Environmental Assessment Act called the Act! of 344/ clearly recogni?ed the relevance of post- development monitoring in the EIA process" #he Act specifies the approach and ob$ectives for monitoring and allows responsible authorities to design and implement impact monitoring (oble and -torey, /00@!" According to the 'anadian Environmental Assessment Agency 'EAA, /004!, the re)uirements specified by the Act are mainly about predictive accuracy to verify the accuracy of the environmental assessment of a pro$ect! and effectiveness of mitigation measures to determine the effectiveness of any measures taken to mitigate the adverse environmental effects of a pro$ect!: and it recommends e,plicitly that the results obtained from the follow-up or monitoring process be used to improve the )uality of environmental assessments, help ensure environmental protection and promote sustainable development" #he legislative re)uirements for monitoring are mandatory for monitoring activities and E they depart from what obtains in Australia and the *+ Ahammed et al., /00E!" 8ne of the criticisms about the 'anadian regulation is that it is reactive and not proactive, meaning that it is not e,plicitly ob$ective-oriented since neither EA generally nor impact monitoring specifically are designed to sit within a planning and policy framework 'EAA, /004!" Analysts say the scope should be e,tended to cover all areas of sustainable development, not $ust on the biophysical environment (oble and -torey, /00@!" Portugal= According to Fesus /000!, the new EIA regulations for %ortugal came into force in /000, containing well defined specifications for the EIA post- evaluation phase" #he targets are to ensure full compliance of pro$ects with EIA decisions and enforce monitoring and auditing in all cases" #o ensure compliance, the regulations made it legally binding on all proponents to submit to competent EIA authority an impact assessment compliance report together with detailed pro$ect proposals!, showing that the pro$ect was developed in compliance with the original EIA decision and that all the proposed mitigation measures were accommodated in the design Arts et al", /003!" .ith the establishment of monitoring programmes, proponents are also mandated to submit monitoring reports periodically to the authority" #he new regulations empower EIA authority to perform audits and verify compliance of all aspects of construction, operation or decommissioning of pro$ects with the original EIA decision and ensure that monitoring programmes are properly implemented Fesus, /000!" T%e "et%erlan/s= #he EIA regulations introduced in the (etherlands in 3451 contained the mandatory re)uirements for pro$ects evaluation" #he specifications were legally backed by Gutch Environmental &anagement Act &ei$er and van Hliet, /000!" #he regulations empowered the competent EIA authority to approve pro$ect decisions, provide evaluation programmes and define what need to be done at each monitoring stage and when" #he authority does all the environmental impact investigations during and after pro$ect implementation" #he proponents 7 are re)uired to cooperate and follow the decisions of the authority" Arts 3445! however observed that in actual practice it is the proponent that does the real monitoring" #he regulations in place are mandatory and thorough, but they have not helped to fully establish EIA impact monitoring practices" Han >amoen and Arts /00/! reports that out of some 500 EIA approved pro$ects only 70 have undergone impact monitoring as at /00/" Unite/ King/om= Ae)uirement for post-development monitoring is absent in the *+ EIA regulations because of effective EIA planning and implementation procedures in place, and the good practices of developers 2oyden, /00/!" #he Environmental &anagement -ystems in place allows for voluntarism and self-regulation and these have been useful in driving the *+ EIA impact monitoring activities &orrison--aunders et al", /006!" &arshall et al. /003! provided instances where industry-led initiatives have played a useful role in follow-up activities in *+" #his practice shows how self-regulation or voluntarism may be utili?ed to make up for deficiencies in government regulation for EIA post- development monitoring" C6ec% Repu7lic= Ae)uirements for monitoring of post-pro$ect impacts in '?echBs EIA system are backed up by the EIA Act of 344/ amended in /003!" According to 2ranis et al" /00@!, the re)uirements specified that developers should conduct impact monitoring of all pro$ects submitted for approval by ensuring accurate data collection on various environmental factors during preparation, implementation and operation phases of pro$ects" #he &inistry of Environment and the Gistrict Environmental 8ffices are main regulators" #he re)uirements are mandatory for all proponents but the shortfall in the '?ech monitoring process is that the Act does not provide any practical background for monitoring activities: there is no effective institutional, personal and financial support in place to impose the laid down re)uirements 2ranis et al", /00@!" Australia= &onitoring is considered as one of the weakest areas in the EIA system in Australia despite government EIA regulations for monitoring 1 contained in the Australian intergovernmental agreement on the environment of 344/ which specify that EIA process would provide a basis for setting environmental conditions and establishing monitoring, management and review programmes 'onacher et al", /000: Ahammed et al", /00E!" #he legislative re)uirement here is largely discretionary making the approach similarity to that of the *+ <arvey, 3445!" In most Australian EIA $urisdiction were there are no legislative re)uirements like -outh Australia and (ew -outh .ales! monitoring is restricted only to licence conditions Ahammed et al", /00E!" 0(8 +ssues in Deeloping Countries &ost of the literature on EIA post- development monitoring has emerged from developed countries with a long tradition of involvement in EIA activities" Few literature on EIA practice in developing countries show that impact monitoring as part of the EIA system is still at its infancy, information on follow-up is meager and scattered, and lessons learnt from e,perience are not well documented and shared amongst partners 8 B 2eime et al", /000: ;onas, /000: Gayo et al", /00/, +engne, /004!" #hese authors identified the following issues as limiting factors to the practice of impact monitoring in developing countries= 3! limited capacity of authorities to undertake EIA follow-up, /! poor regulatory and procedural framework and 6! issues concerning human health and well-being AIG- and malaria inhibit workersB productivity!" A review of regulatory re)uirements for monitoring in three developing countries will suffice here" Et%iopia= #he first comprehensive statement of Environmental %olicy covering all aspects of the EIA process was approved in 3441 E%A, 3441!" Among other issues, the policy specified the need for regular and accurate assessment and monitoring of environmental conditions and to ensure that EIA considers not only physical and biophysical impacts but also all aspects of sustainable development" It also specified that public consultations should be an integral part of EIA follow- up process and that the process should allow for an independent review and public comments before consideration by decision makers ;onas, /000!" #he 5 follow-up re)uirements apply mostly to pro$ects whose location, nature or scale makes them very likely to have significant impacts on the environment" ;onas /00/! reported that the Ethiopian EIA system still has little e,perience with initiating and completing impact monitoring of developmental pro$ects" EIA follow-up legal documents are being enforced to help the system" Sout% Africa= %ost-decision follow-up re)uirements were included as conditions for pro$ect approval in the new -outh African EIA regulations promulgated in /007 -andham et al", /001!" #he re)uirements are made mandatory for all impact monitoring activities but because the processes involved are not well laid out, enforcement has been weak ;outhed, /004!" #he level of compliance among developers is reportedly lower than anticipated" "igeria= Ae)uirements for impact monitoring in (igeria have been in place before /006 but they are relatively not well observed even though they are mandatory for all large EIA pro$ects" Gayo et al" /00/! found that only about 60I of approved pro$ects were monitored by the countryBs regulatory agency" >ack of political will has kept monitory in a slow transitory pace" 8( -O"+TOR+"2 TASKS A"D RESPO"S+B+1+T+ES #he task and responsibility for post- development monitoring are usually dependent on specifications in the EIA follow-up regulations and also on the type of pro$ect to be monitored" #hree groups of stakeholders are usually involved in monitoring tasks" #hese are the proponent initiator or developer!, the regulator conductor! and the community participants! &orrison- -aunders, et al., /006!" Impact monitoring programmes driven by proponents are often self-regulatory or based on voluntarism or industry-led initiatives as evident in Environmental &anagement -ystems &orrison- -aunders et al", /001!" In the *+ this practice is greatly entrenched" <owever when impact monitoring is driven by the regulators, the focus is typically on ensuring that proponents comply with all EIA decisions as well as learning from e,perience to improve the EIA system 4 .ood, /000!" Impact monitoring may also be initiated by communities concerned about environmental impacts in their neighbourhood" -ometimes agencies may be established to oversee or conduct monitoring through independent actions where they act as Jenvironmental watch dogsB and help promote two-way communication between partners as evident in 'anada, <ong +ong and %ortugal <ui, /000: Fesus, /000!" In most developed countries like 'anada, '?ech and the (etherlands!, depending on the type of pro$ect, government agencies and proponents are usually re)uired to carry out monitoring" In 'anada, for instance, proponents are usually reluctant in the case of socio- economic monitoring (oble and -torey, /00@: 'EAA, /004!" 9enerally, proponents will not always want to engage in impact monitoring that appear to be beyond their control or outside their mandate, not minding the potential financial benefits" <owever, the prevailing EIA decision re)uirement for these countries is that proponents have to undertake impact monitoring or follow- up as a condition for pro$ect approval 8 B 2eime et al", /000: 'EAA, /004!" In Australia, developers are re)uired to carry out pro$ectsB impact monitoring under planned consent conditions or the legal environmental permit system as a make-up for the weak legislative regulations in place Ahammed et al", /00E!" In <ong +ong, public participation in the EIA monitoring process is greatly encouraged, though the E%G and proponents are more involved in the actual field monitoring practice Arts et al", /003!" &onitoring information is usually made public to those interested especially via E%G website" <ui /000! reported that sometimes web-cameras are installed on buildingDconstruction sites to transmit real-time monitoring activities" #his is a big merit to the process since democratic participation in monitoring encourages far reaching cooperate efforts needed for success in environmental performance" In %ortugal, proponents and the EIA authorities do most of the monitoring" .hile proponents do the field work and 30 present reports, the competent authorities verify accuracy of compliance to EIA decisions and make informed $udgments Arts, et al", /003!" &onitoring and audit reports are usually made public" Individual citi?ens and (98s are allowed to raise complaints about the environmental impacts of pro$ects" 'omplaints are handled by competent authorities Fesus, /000!" In Ethiopia, -outh Africa and (igeria African countries! competent authorities like the environmental protection agencies at the federal and regional levels! along side developers and other stakeholders are involved in the EIA monitoring process" E,isting regulations specified that the pro$ect proponents developers! should be responsible for undertaking monitoring e,aminations to determine compliance with EI- while competent authorities do the final verifications >i, /005!" &onitoring is still at its very infancy in these countries" &( CO"C1UD+"2 ASSESS-E"T A"D RECO--E"DAT+O"S &(. Conclu/ing Assessment Gifferent legislative re)uirements for monitoring are in place in the developed and developing countries e,amined, e,cept in the *+ where monitoring is largely self-regulatory" .hile the re)uirements are discretionary in Australia and *+, they are largely mandatory in others and legally binding on the proponents" A comparison of the developed and developing countries reveals that the latter tend to include a standard set of components in their EIA systems that facilitate implementation" #he developed countries have a robust track record of public participation in impact monitoring, meaningful consideration of alternatives and also consideration of cumulative impacts" #his is especially the case with 'anada, Australia and the (etherlands who are reputed to have the strongest EIA procedures" In developing countries especially Africa! impact monitoring practices are recent and there is so much political la,ity to enforce the legislative re)uirements in place" #he monitoring re)uirements do not clearly specify and e,plain what work is needed and who is responsible for what, and little attention 33 is given to accountability and commitment of parties involved" Finally, the review of the monitoring re)uirements in all the countries shows that there seems to be so much focus on better biophysical environmental performance than the broader issue of sustainable development" -ocial, economic and other human environmental effects are not addressed" It was the sustainability agenda that birthed the EIA process and any EIA monitoring regulation or procedure that fails to connect with aspects of sustainability will not be helping the broad developmental agenda" &(0 Recommen/ations Impact monitoring has been identified as a veritable incentive for improving the )uality of environmental management of pro$ects" #o make the process more effective, there will be need to employ the following recommendations= i" legislative re)uirements should be robust enough to e,plain in clear terms what needs to be done, by who and when, and should target meeting the goals of sustainable development, ii" attention should be given to clear and accountable commitments of parties involved especially in developing countries, iii" )uality can be improved through the establishment of e,ternal independent! bodies to take over the reviewing of monitoring programmes and results $ust as 'anada has done, iv" openness, continuous reporting and public participation can strengthen impact monitoring and help address concerns like uncertainty, sensitivity and feasibility: information technology should be $udiciously utilised to create new opportunities for public involvement in the process $ust as <ong +ong has done, v" training and capacity building is re)uired mostly for developing countries that have little e,perience: creating information e,change network will facilitate learning" 3/ RE9ERE"CES A%amme/, A an/ "i:on, B ;0<<=>( Environmental Impact &onitoring in the EIA %rocess of -outh Australia" Environmental Impact Assessment Aeview /7 /007! @/7- @@1" Arts, ? ;.@@A>( EIA Follow-*p= 8n the Aole of E,-post Evaluation in Environmental Impact Assessment" 9eo %ress, 9roningen /6-67!" Arts, ?(, Cal/4ell, P an/ -orrison#Saun/ers, A ;0<<.>( Environmental Impact Assessment Follow-*p= 9ood %ractice and Future Girections" Findings from a workshop at the IAIA /000 'onference" Impact Assessment and %ro$ect Appraisal, volume 34, number 6 -urrey, *+!= pages 31E-35E" Barr!, S ;.@@A!" E,-%ost Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment" In %orter, A and Fittipaidi eds" Environmental ðod Aeview= Ae-#ooling the Impact Assessment for the (ew 'entury" Available online at http=DD www"iaia"orgDpublicdocumentsDspecial-publictionsD9reenI/02ookKEnvironment I/0ðodsI/0Aeview"pdf pages 6@-@E!" Accessed on 3@D/D/030" Bo!/en, A ;0<<0>( +eeping a %romise= #he Implementation of &itigation &easures in EIA" %aper presented at IAIAB- /00/ Follow-*p .orkshop, 3E-/3 Fune, #he <ague, (etherlands" Branis, - an/ C%ristopoulos, S ;0<<&!" &andated &onitoring of %ost-%ro$ect Impacts in the '?ech EIA" Environmental Impact Assessment Aeview /E /00E! //1-/65" Canter, 1 ;.@@B>( Environmental Impact Assessment" -econd Edition" (ew ;ork= &c9raw-<ill, Inc" %ages E5-14" Carpenter, R ;.@@B>( #he 'ase for 'ontinuous &onitoring and Adaptive &anagement under (E%A" In 'lark, A and 'anter, > eds" #owards a (ational Environmental %olicy" Gelray 2each, Fia= -t >ucie %ress" %ages /6-EE" CEAA ;Cana/ian Enironmental Assessment Agenc!> 0<<@" Increasing the *tility of Follow-*p in 'anadian Environmental Assessment= A review of Ae)uirements, 'oncepts and E,perience" Available online at http=DDwww"ceaa- Acee"gc"caDdefault"aspDdefaultLlangME(CnM053713'1-3CoffsetM5CtocMshow" Accessed on 36D/D/030" 36 Conac%er, A an/ Conac%er, ? ;0<<<>( Environmental %lanning and &anagement in Australia" Hictoria, Australia=8,ford *niversity %ress pages /6-77!" Da!o, 9(, ACa)ai!e, B(, E)e, "(, Omolo!in, O an/ A/in!e, P ;0<<0!" Environmental Assessment Follow-*p %rogramme as a 'omponent of the (igerian EIA %rocess= An Appraisal" %aper presented at IAIABs /00/ Follow-*p .orkshop, 3E-/3 Fune, the <ague, (etherlands" EPA ;Enironmental Protection Agenc!> .@@D" Environmental %olicy of the Federal Gemocratic Aepublic of Ethiopia" 9overnment of Ethiopia %ublications" 2eorge, C ;0<<<>( 'omparative Aeview of Environmental Assessment %rocedures and %ractice" In >ee, ( and 9eorge, ' eds"! Environmental Assessment in Geveloping and #ransitional 'ountries Fohn .iley and -ons, 'hichester!: pages 5E-330" Hare!, " ;.@@A>( EIA= %rocedures, %ractice and %rospects in Australia" &elbourne= 8,ford *niversity %ress" %ages 3/-@1" Hui, S ;0<<<!" Environmental &onitoring and Audit= %ast, %resent and Future" %aper presented at the IAIA /000 2ack to the Future 'onference, EIA Follow-*p -tream, <ong +ong 'onvention and E,hibition 'entre, 34-/6 Fune, <ong +ong" ?esus, ? ;0<<<>( Introduction to EIA Follow-*p into the (ew EIA Aegulations in %ortugal" %aper presented at the IAIA /000 2ack to the Future 'onference, EIA Follow- *p -tream, <ong +ong 'onvention and E,hibition 'entre, 34-/6 Fune, <ong +ong" Kengne, " ;0<<@!" Environmental 'ompliance and &onitoring of %etroleum Gevelopment and %ipeline %ro$ects in Geveloping 'ountries= A 'ase -tudy of 'had- 'ameroon %ipeline %ro$ect" 8nline material, available at http=DDwww"iaia" 8rgDiaia04ghanaDdocumentsDcsDcs/-EK(gouanaKEnvironmentalKcomplainceKand Kmonitoring"pdf" Accessed on 3@D/D/030" 1i, ? ;0<<A!" EIA in Geveloping 'ountries= An 8pportunity for 9reater Environmental -ecurity" .orking %aper (umber @: Foundation for Environmental -ecurity and -ustainability" -ars%all, R(, Smit%, " an/ Erig%t, R ;0<<.>( A (ew 'hallenge for Industry= Integrating EIA within 8perational E&-" %aper presented at IAIA /003 EIA Follow-*p 8utcome and Improvement .orkshop, /7 &ay-3 Fune, 'artagena, 'olumbia" 3@ -eiCer, ? an/ an ,liet, ? ;0<<<!" EIA Evaluation= Added Halue by -creening and -coping" %aper presented at the IAIA /000 2ack to the Future 'onference, EIA Follow- *p -tream, <ong +ong 'onvention and E,hibition 'entre, 34-/6 Fune, <ong +ong" -orrison#Saun/ers, A(, Ba)er, ? an/ Arts, ? ;0<<8>( >essons from the %ractice= #owards -uccessful Follow-*p" Impact Assessment and %ro$ect Appraisal Fournal, Hol" /3, (o" 3" 2eech #ree %ublishing, -urrey, *+" -orrison#Saun/ers, A(, -ars%all, R an/ Arts, ? ;0<<D>( EIA Follow-*p= International 2est %ractice %rinciples" -pecial %ublication -eries (o" 7, Fargo, *-A= International Association for Impact Assessment IAIA!" "o7le, B an/ Store!, K ;0<<&>( #owards Increasing the *tility of Follow-*p in 'anadian EIA" Environmental Impact Assessment Aeview //= 376-350" O F Beime, S(, Clar), - an/ Pree6, ? ;0<<<>( EIA Follow-*p= %erspectives on a 2urgeoining Aluminium Industry in two Geveloping 'ountries" %aper presented at the IAIA /000 2ack to the Future 'onference, EIA Follow-*p -tream, <ong +ong 'onvention and E,hibition 'entre, 34-/6 Fune, <ong +ong" San/%am, 1 an/ Retief, 9 ;0<<D>( EIA Follow-*p for Filling -tations in the (orth-west %rovince of -outh Africa" Available online at http=DDwww""docstoc"comDdocsD357EE44/DEIA-follow-up-for-filling-stations-in-the-(orth- west-province-of-south-Africa" Accessed on 3ED/D/030" S%ep%er/, A ;.@@A!" %ost-%ro$ect Impact Assessment and &onitoring" In %orter, A and Fittipaidi eds" Environmental ðod Aeview= Ae-#ooling the Impact Assessment for the (ew 'entury" Available online at http=DD www"iaia"orgDpublicdocumentsDspecial- publictionsD9reenI/02ookKEnvironment I/0ðodsI/0Aeview"pdf pages 6@-@E!" Accessed on 3@D/D/030" ,an 1amoen, 9 an/ Arts, ? ;0<<0>( EIA Follow-*p for Aoad %ro$ects= .hat do we want and need to doL %aper presented at IAIABs /00/ Follow-*p .orkshop, 3E-/3 Fune, the <ague, (etherlands" Eoo/, 2 ;0<<<>( Is .hat ;ou -ee .hat ;ou 9etL %ost-development Auditing of ðods used for predicting the ?one of visual influence in EIA" Environmental Impact Assessment Aeview /0 /000! E61-EE7" 3E Yonas, T ;0<<<>( 'urrent -tatus of EIA -ystem in Ethiopia= EIA -tudy and Follow-*p" In &c'abe, & and -adler, 2 eds"! -tudies of EIA %ractice in Geveloping 'ountries" A -upplement to the *(E% #raining Aesource &anual, *(E% %ublications, /000= page 604" Yout%e/, ? ;0<<@!" Assessment and &anaging the %otential for 'ompliance Gefault of Applications -ubmitted in terms of -outh AfricaBs Environmental Impact Assessment Aegulations" *npublished %hG #hesis, *niversity of -outh Africa Gepartment of 9eography!= pages 4- 11" 37